Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Higgins for tabling this Private Members' motion. I take on board what the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock, said about having a proper debate. He is on the Government side and it is in his hands to control the debate. Perhaps he will schedule such an open debate in the House. It would be an ideal way to commemorate the Lock-out of 1913 and the historic event it was.

As Deputy Higgins stated, we have a very well trained and highly skilled workforce, but unfortunately many of them ply their trades in Australia, Canada, the United States, England and throughout the world. I hope it will not be the legacy of the Government, but I fear it probably will be, that our young people will continue to have to ply their trades throughout the world rather than here building our society.

The Lock-out of 1913 was a huge struggle, as outlined by many Deputies, when the workers of Dublin stood against the establishment and employers and looked to defend their rights. Many of them were starved, attacked and murdered for standing up for these rights. The Lock-out lasted for more than six months. While it is true that it ended in what would have been seen at the time as a defeat for the union, in the years afterwards the legacy of the union activism shown by Jim Larkin and James Connolly in 1913 was built on and developed by unions throughout the country. Workers learned the lessons of the Lock-out and built and fought for their rights and gained many rights along the way. Now, 100 years on, we are debating it in the House, and while the Government, corporations and the European Union have refined their methods over the years, they are still the same in terms of undermining workers' rights. They make workers into individual contractors who work for corporations rather than members of a union or a body of employees who work together for the benefit of everybody involved in the contract and arrangement.

In recent times the European Commission has been flexing its muscles to undermine workers' rights and wages throughout the European Union. Two countries in Europe, the Netherlands and Belgium, entered the excessive deficit procedure in 2009 and were given terms for reducing the deficit. In 2012 both had the same deficit but the Commissioner, Olli Rehn, has decided to attack the Belgian people for what they are doing and is demanding that they fundamentally reform their wage mechanisms because the way in which they are closing the deficit is not to the liking of the European Commission. He is totally silent on the Netherlands, where it has been made easier to make workers redundant, cut wages and attack workers' rights.

In recent years, Ireland saw a much lauded social partnership that emasculated the unions. They willingly entered the tent, sat down with the Government and employers and lost the will to support workers' rights and to fight on their behalf. We have seen the outworkings of partnership, with the Government, including the Labour Party, passing the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2013, a modern day ultimatum to workers along the William Martin Murphy lines that tells them they must be in the right unions to protect their wages.

Last night, the Minister, in outlining the reforms to the labour market, referred to workplace relations reforms. He outlined how the Employment Appeals Tribunal and other bodies were dragging their heels, as he would have us believe, in resolving issues. He outlined plans for replacing the five bodies with two. However, resources are the problem, as resources allow the bodies to process claims in reasonable times. It is a worthwhile aspiration that cases should be concluded within four weeks, but the only way to realise this is to provide resources.

The Employment Appeals Tribunal is a vital tool for workers in asserting their rights. I have experience on both tides of the tribunal. It is an important institution in which workers can have their rights respected in a cost effective, reasonable and quick way, but only if the necessary reforms are resourced. It is in everyone's interests, employers and workers alike, to have issues resolved quickly and properly.

I support the calls in the motion, particularly the call for union recognition. It is vital that workers have this demand legally guaranteed. Recently, the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine held hearings with large retail multiples about their code of practice. I put questions to them regarding union recognition. They refuse to deal with unions regarding their workers' rights. I am referring to low-paid, precarious workers who are at the will of the companies and must fight for their rights on their own without the support of their colleagues or unions. The relevant legislation should be introduced without delay.

See this speech in context